If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Americans can thank the Supreme Court for the attempted car bombing of Times Square, as well as any future terrorist attacks that might be less "amateurish" and which our commander in chief will be unable to thwart unless the bomb fizzles.

That's worked so well that Obama's own attorney general is now talking about making massive exceptions to the Miranda warnings -- exceptions that will apply to all criminal suspects, by the way -- in order to deal with terrorists having to be read their rights as a bomb is about to go off.

Let's be clear: When Eric Holder thinks we're being too easy on terrorists, we are being too easy on terrorists.

Either the five liberal justices demanding constitutional rights for terrorists are out of their minds, or the religious worship of President Franklin D. Roosevelt has got to stop. According to liberal logic in the war on terrorism, FDR was a bloodthirsty war criminal.

When six Germans and two Americans were suspected of plotting an attack on U.S. munitions plants during World War II, FDR immediately ordered them arrested and tried in a secret military tribunal held behind closed doors at the Department of Justice.

Within weeks, all were found guilty. Six of the eight, including one U.S. citizen, were given the electric chair. One German was sentenced to life in prison and the other American citizen -- who had turned himself in and revealed the plot to the FBI -- got 30 years.

The Supreme Court upheld the secret trial, but didn't get around to producing an opinion until after Old Sparky had rendered its own verdict.

Consider that the eight saboteurs never actually did anything other than enter the country illegally, which I gather is considered a constitutional right these days (except in my future home state of Arizona).

Still, FDR had them executed or imprisoned after trial in a secret military tribunal.

How many future car bombers would be discouraged if Faisal Shahzad were tried by military tribunal and executed by, say, the end of the month? What if Army doctor Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan had already gotten the chair?

But we can't do that because, according to five Supreme Court justices who aren't "progressive" enough for American liberals, terrorists waging war on U.S. soil get full constitutional protections.

It sure sounds like something libtards wouldn't want people to know about.

Meh. They generally ignore the facts that are inconvenient to their narrative. I mean how many people know that Lincoln without due process imprisoned Maryland legislators at the onset of the civil war? Or that he deported journalists who did not report the war to his satisfaction? How many people know that Wilson while generally one of the very WORST presidents we've ever had sent troops into Russia in an attempt to rescue the Czar from the commies?

Meh. They generally ignore the facts that are inconvenient to their narrative. I mean how many people know that Lincoln without due process imprisoned Maryland legislators at the onset of the civil war? Or that he deported journalists who did not report the war to his satisfaction? How many people know that Wilson while generally one of the very WORST presidents we've ever had sent troops into Russia in an attempt to rescue the Czar from the commies?

the troops Wilson sent were confused on who they were fighting and ended up fighting both the Reds and Czarist. Most of the troops were in Western Russia and couldn't do a lot for the Czar anyway...